Hacker News Reader

Comment by ASlave2Gravity | Hacker News Reader

I've heard bad things about writing articles on Wikis. Lots of ego-wars. Not really sure it's worth my time? If it's a good place to be, I'm happy to help.

EDIT: But I do trust it. So maybe it doesn't matter?

View on HN

I trusted Wikipedia until I've read articles for which I knew aobut the topic beforehand, too. Now.. not anymore. Pretty sure the crazies with lots of times on their hand have won the editing wars.

There's a music channel on YouTube that does "Fact or Fiction" with musicians, where they fact-check the person's Wikipedia page with them.

Sometimes they don't even get through the first sentence before the person has to stop them with corrections.

And thank you for the link.

edit: sorry, was being a bit rude.

Loudwire — Wikipeda: Fact or Fiction? https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvXmarOi5xICV0X4HfMH7S29E...

That's it. Sorry, didn't know the name of the channel.

Which assumes that the musicians aren't lying, but yes, an occasional lying musician is probably still more accurate overall than Wikipedia's sourcing.

There is a lot of ego, especially on political debates, other articles have a much better quality.

I don't know a feasible solution, but I often think the prominent voices are more of a problem than the average contributor.

Maybe not tracking the amount of contributios would help. More anonymous access to help against echo chambers and networks?

That's very interesting RE prominent voices. I guess getting into an ego-war with whoever likes to crit your ideas probably happens from time to time.

But I do remember reading about a physicist who wasn't allowed to edit the Wiki on their theory! (sorry can't remember who / when)

iirc it was someone from Periodic Videos or Numberphile

Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer".

:Would you really prefer it if Wikipedia allowed David Miscavige ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Miscavige ) to edit the Wikipedia page on Scientology ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology )?

:Wikipedia's policies on writing about yourself are spot on. See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Best_practices_for_e...

Compared to what? I have the same issue with books in my focus areas that are widely revered, and even some peer-reviewed articles in good journals. I often disagree with things said on Wikipedia, but that's because I often disagree with the novice-accessible versions of things I know a lot about.

Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer".

See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...

Re "I've heard bad things about writing articles on Wikis. Lots of ego-wars." you hear those things from new Wikipedia users who decide that the first thing they should do is either [A] "Fix" the Donald Trump article, [B] try to use Wikipedia to advertise their garage band, or [C] try to correct the biases I list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:YWAB

If you pick an article, check the history, and find that it ISN'T getting 300 edits every day, you will have a much easier time improving that article.

My Wikipedia page has a link so you can email me. I will be glad to help if you want to become a Wikipedia editor.

EDIT: Fixed a bad link.

thank you very much. Will get in touch when the time is right.

Also, that link doesn't work. think you need a dot! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Yes._We_are_bia...)

It turns out that the ycombinator.com software won't accept a link that ends with a dot.

This works:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:YWAB

Your bias link doesn’t appear to be correct.

Thanks! looks like it was a screwup by the ycombinator.com software. The original link ends with a period, and the software stripped it out -- probably because adding a period after a link that is at the end of a sentence is a common error.

I replaced it with another page on Wikipedia that redirects to the "User:Guy Macon/Yes. We are biased." page.

Full disclosure: I am the author of the Wikipedia essay "Wikipedia has cancer".

See https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=21700802 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...

Ego-wars are all over the place, even if you avoid political and BLP articles. Burnt-out long-time editors are the most combative. Due to their connections, they won't get blocked.

Wikipedia is largely fine, as long as you stay away from things activists are currently interested in.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com